Historical objects should be brought back to their country of origin.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It is true that each country’s historical objectives were
sent to other countries for various reasons. With regards to this, some people
said they have to be brought back to their own country of origin. In this
essay, I will discuss about this situation.
The reasons why some countries’ historical heritage are
various. It can be historical reasons or it can be an unavoidable reason such
as financial problem. Therefore, I would be cautious to claim that historical
object should be brought back to their country. I believe that they should be
sent depending on the reasons. For example, if some country cannot afford to
manage their heritage, they have to let it go. In addition, it is hard to
define whose historical object was. Nevertheless, if they can prove it is
theirs and they have a good environment for heritage, the historical heritage
should be sent.
However, I believe that historical heritage is more meaningful,
if they were where they were made. It is because historical objects made by
some reasons in that place. Thus, if they lose their place, the can lose their
cultural identity as well. I do think the area where historical objects are
kept also have a significant meaning.
To conclude, it is hard to say historical object should be in
place, because the reasons are various. However, I agree with this to a certain
extent. It is because the area of historical objective is part of their
meaning.
글자수: 246...ㅜ
시간: 49분..ㅠㅠㅠ
목표 7